My strategy is to always be on the Quakes attacking side. I don't want to see the other team scoring and celebrating against our crap defense. My seats are towards LOBINA on the north/west side, and then I'll squat in a seat on the other side toward the ultras. Usually the Quakes are attacking on my side in the 1st half, so I move to the ultras side in the 2nd half. I could only do that kind of squatting thing if Quakes games weren't generally poorly attended. If we ever got to a point where we were truly getting close to filling up PPP I wouldn't be able to do it - one advantage of being a fan of a bad team with few fans. I think I've been kicked out of my squatted seat once or so, and then I just move to another row. You just sort of pretend to look at your ticket, and then "whoops, how'd that happen!?" My *real seats* are right over here!
Only one time though. I look at it this way. Do I want to see Tanner Beason play up close, or Cristian Espinoza?
If you’re going to make a change at GM, make it asap. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/57...a-fired-what-next/?source=user_shared_articleWhat next for Atlanta United?
There's a flaw in that logic. What if your interim coach is no better, or worse, than your previous head coach? Rob Valentino was an American D2 player (played with the SJ Frogs in 2007!) and coach who has been an assistant coach for Atlanta D2 and MLS teams for a few years (and had one other short stint as interim). He is not a coach who has proven success at the D1 level other than a few games in 2021. In fact he had never been a head coach in any league prior to a few games as interim in 2021. That said, Lagerwey is probably right that "the player models and recruiting strategies [could be] the issue". We have the same deal here. A lot of people are high on Ian and he may be a good D1 coach, but he doesn't have a proven track record in that regard. If our record doesn't improve much with Ian over Luchi, is it that we (still) need a better coach or are there issues with "player models and recruiting strategies". I think there's gotta be at least some of the latter in our case.
I think it’s just the simple bounce teams may see after a coach is let go. For whatever reason, players or the team has an immediate improvement. Because it’s a breath of fresh air, or they know they need to demonstrate an improvement for the potential new coach or suitors. Even if the interim coach is or is not a good coach, if their coaching methods differ, you’d have to give them some time to make an impact. That’s not the point.
Well, yes, that's why I'm not totally convinced by Lagerwey's logic. You can't say that the failure of an interim coach "proves" that the reason your team is bad is because your roster is bad. Maybe you just need a better coach, or even to give the interim more time to make an impact and develop his "system" and training methods, etc. I mean I understand the concept of having a single independent variable in a more or less stable environment and measuring the result. But 1) an experiment with sample size of 2 (coaches) is not great, and 2) your 2nd coach measurement is short - half a season?. And we haven't even gotten to the possibility that your second coach may have 0 experience as a successful coach of a D1 team. So how valid even is your "2nd coach measurement".
They just don't care, it's all around their experience... Unfortunately, they are all special, and everyone else isn't. I can't count the number of times a kid has ignored me, walked into me, stopped immediately having passed me, etc. They are all special, we just need to accept it.
It’s all of the above. I see it as similar to a second string player getting his chance to play/start. If they’re hungry, let alone capable, they’ll make the most of it. Even if it’s just a short term bump.
The "new coach bump" is not sustainable if they're not a good coach though. And you have to give it enough time to determine that. It's even possible that a truly good coach would have worse results at the start because they're trying to institute a new system whereas a mediocre coach might just go with the status quo and try to ride the "new coach bump".
Agree it’s not sustainable. That’s why you call it a bump. But if the players aren’t good enough, regardless of system, then it’s the players.
Ugh. I hate squatters. They are constantly coming into our area. I don’t understand why the quakes stopped checking tickets.
When we got to our Bay seats for the last game, three people were sitting in them. They moved in front of us to the first row, and then when someone came to claim those seats, they disappeared. They didn't seem the least bit embarrassed, which I guess is a good attitude to have if you're going to try to take someone else's seats. And, oh yes, they also blocked our view with their photography!
I only squat in areas that are sparsely populated, like no one in the row, etc. and hardly anyone in surrounding rows. It's easy to find spots like that at PPP for Quakes games. I'm a very respectful, low impact squatter. I'll go up to the very top row if I have to but there are usually lots and lots of open seats.
Yeah, my section only gets the disrespectful high-impact squatters. Plus, very few are wearing Quakes gear, and don’t appear to be fans for either team.